utopian

Mm... I mean, what is vanity. Googling it brings up a definition of "excessive pride in or admiration of one's own appearance or achievements." There are things I admire about myself, to be sure, which I feel are warranted. I think if I am to see vanity in myself, it would be in the future I have not created yet. There are things I have run into that I thought I could do that I discovered I could not. There are also amazing things I have proven myself to be capable of. But if I see vanity in myself, I think it would be in the future I believe I am capable of building but have not yet done. I know its possible... Andrew Jackson had a life where he achieved a lot of these things. I am in love with building a story like that... in love with my own story that hasnt come to pass yet. And I feel like if I were to achieve these things, no one would really even appreciate it so why bother! I also think vanity, and ego, can be fairly neutral. Not Hitler's kind of vanity lol. A symptom of child abuse? Perhaps. I didnt have it easy myself. Although you must admit, you and I and anyone else just on this forum must be a cut above the rest of most people, who usually don't have enough braincells to rub together to consider philosophy. In our capacity for philosophy we have power, and if we do not handle that power responsibly or morally, we might become a burden to humanity ourselves. Is it not then our duty as higher functioning humans to look after the rest of the race? And then after considering that, is the idea of living your life to the fullest. If you are capable of, oh I don't know, ending the Fed, and you never do it, well then its a life lived ironically. Pointlessly, perhaps. A delicious cake meant for eating, that never was. Is it not a philosophical endeavor to discover your capacity, and live it to the fullest? To be able to say, at the end of your life, " I was capable of helping a lot of people, and I did." Is a lot more fulfilling than saying at the end of your life " I was capable of helping a lot of people, but only helped a couple few." Now this humility thing seems... deceiving to me. Stef is capable of an awful lot as we have seen, and he has striven to make every moment count. I just spent ten minutes looking for a video for you from Stef but I couldnt find it. It was the one where he says "I was going to be god damned if I was going to let cancer strike me down in the prime of my life." He also says something about "all sex is glorious" and the gist of the speech is about living life to your fullest capacity. I am finding the edges of my capacity. I have already achieved amazing things. I am not quite sure where the end of my capacity is. One of the things I am speaking to is that I believe there is quite a lot I can achieve. It seems to be coming at the cost of my relationships with other humans however, and while I have lived my life mostly without them, I am starting to recognize what a loss that is. What I dont know is, is it a greater loss to realize my potential, or to go through life without relationships. You should see my list of things I want to talk to Stef about

Hmm... the slaves as children thing is interesting. I take it thats why Stef purveys the NAP for children? I identify with this idea that my thoughts and preferences etc. are not taken into consideration. This seems to be in agreement with my resistance to do things I know I am capable of. I must say as the video goes on I feel him hitting some interesting true points. This goes however to prove my point that no the world does not care about me, and as such I refuse to care for it. Society does not care for your preferences as a person, you are just a cog in its machine. And now Stef is laying out the great secret, and I feel even more justified. I dont have to do anything. Sure there are consequences, but I have considered that. There seem to be more adverse complications TO my contributions than there are in my withdrawing them. I do whatever I want to do which will provide me possibilities I want, but I feel like I have eloquently figured out what the most worthwile ventures have been. And it seems like Stef's logic is not always applicable. I realize I don't have to sleep with women. I just want to. But if I want to sleep with women, I HAVE to talk to them. Theres no getting away from the have tos in a lot of situations. So besides proving my point yourself, as Stef and this thread has noticed, society does not care for men and treats them like foolish comedic reliefs good only for feminism's slavery under socialism. Sure Stef and this forum seems to be full of caring people, but people here are the exception, not the rule. Now this thing about the world not caring for me, if that is the rules we are going by, fine, I would follow that line of thought all the way down to I shouldnt care about you or anyone else if I want to kill you and take your stuff. Do we really need to go over all the reasons why this thread of logic is flawed? If humans are not striving to care for each other, we are not realizing the heights of human capacity, and are little more than savage monkeys. Unfortunately, the savage monkey thing seems to be too common in humanity for me to bother caring about it. Excuse me for not watching the video right now, I just watched the other video and I need to get moving today. I will watch it later. I know you don't know me very well, and I have not posted so much to let you or others know what it is about me that is so capable, but yes, I am quite confident in my ability to change the world. If I just stopped procrastinating. Or moreso I feel, if I found adequate motivation to do it. But in what ways do you not see the world killing itself off? Wars? The Great Pacific Garbage Patch? Fujiyama? Overpopulation? I didn't have a hand in any of these things, humanity is doing it to itself all on its own. What I could have a hand in, is putting a stop to something of it. Not all of it, but a great contribution. And perhaps you and others don't believe I myself could contribute so much, but you know others out there could, say, Bill Gates. Its possible outside anyone's consideration of me. I am saying I could if I tried. I am here to sort out why I should try.

That's too long for me right now (thats what she said) but I will try to watch it as soon as I can. I am also trying to catch up on Stef's recent shows as someone told me there is something helpful in there for me somewhere but he didnt remember exactly where. Yea I could see me avoiding my emotions, but I feel thats justified, as emotions have always just gotten in my way. Especially in today's society, if a man has emotions, he is barred from proceeding in whatever endeavor he pursues, from relationships to work. It is certainly one of my philosophical struggles that I loathe striving for a world that refuses to care about me, but if I do not work, I cant get myself ahead either. The worth of changing the world to me is many faceted. It would be a realization of my capacity. It would be a mark in history. It would be an altruistic contribution to the betterment of humanity. It is meaningful to me. My problem with it, my lack of motivation, is that most people in this world are not worth my caring for, and I tend to find MORE motivation in letting it kill itself off, even contributing to that end. It would be the hard stuff in itself if I did it. Perhaps that is also why I avoid it. I do plan to post many of my thoughts here on this forum, perhaps in journal form. I have come to many conclusions on my own that seem very logical, but keep me trapped in my current position. I think I wont get anywhere unless I start getting some feedback. Thank you for your complement, but I don't feel brave. I feel only philosophical, that I have sought, found and accepted the truth about myself, and have shared this truth without regard to societies judge-mentality. It is an example in itself of the world being a despicable place, that it must be a brave thing to do to share such truths.

No

Mmm, not exactly. It is a bad thing if it comes before the economy is ready for it. Better than just shoving the proverbial washing machine into society, you would rather introduce it slowly over time, so those who used to be clothes washers have time to develop skills to get a different job. I am for installing all machines to where they can provide resources. It will free up human resources for application in other more complex and useful areas. But we have to consider as well, what this will mean for the human condition in the long run. Most of human history up until now is humans working out of necessity, and having a life of meaning for it. What kind of philosophical catastrophe will we have on our hands, when we begin to find most of human life does not need to work, and is unnecessary? How long can you go playing all day, before people start to get tired of it? Part of the human experience, I think, is overcoming problems that come up in every day life, and being proud for doing it. Technology has the capability to remove that from us. I would say it is not possible for the population bubble to have been sustained by the fiat currency issue alone. Fiat currency may have contributed, because of the illusion of more wealth when there is none. But no matter how much extra money you print, there is never gonna be more bread for people to eat, until someone makes more. That, therefore, had to be developed by the industrial revolution.

Thanks love, thats some interesting food for thought. I like that bit about reflecting between people. I often don't, but neither do others towards me, or ask questions as if they are curious and such. Hmm... I think if I started to empathize with what happened to me as a child today, I would be fairly angry and violent. There was some fucked up shit. I will see about John's recording. His weakness, his desire for greatness, his struggles in that endeavor. Its a medieval fantasy novel where he becomes a god, but he starts out as human, and lives a life as an intelligent, physically frail and hurt person, surrounded by unthinking strong neanderthals. There are several novels he is in I might go for days talking about it.

Often, I cannot. The most prominent character I can think of empathizing with was a character named Rastlin in the Dragonlance series, when I read it a good long while ago. Some other books, to a lesser extent. Any visual media however I genuinely do not empathize with.

You are speaking to the aspect of jobs developing character correct? That jobs provide a sense of self worth, of accomplishment at facing an unwanted burden of work and following through with it. That will still be there, but the reward will be much less diminished. If you create a pizza from scratch when you have a 3D printer that can do it, well good on you, you achieved a milestone in your life. It was still a lot less costly in time and energy for the robot to do it. Yes, robots doing work would be for the owners of the robot, and/or humanity in general, to benefit from. It will allow people to stop concentrating on more mundane jobs like farming, and concentrate on things like human development and space exploration. In the case of automatized fast food, consider that robots could grow, harvest, and prepare all materials necessary to create food for consumption. If that was the case, and there were enough robots, then no one would need to worry about buying any of it, they would just get it for free. The purpose being that everyone can now concentrate on more complicated endeavors. We seem to be in agreement on the same sentiment. The thing is, technology has improved at such a drastic rate, it is ready to create titanic shifts in the world economy, and the world is not ready to comprehend it. Ahaaaa! Ahahaaaaa! Now you are thinking like a 1%er! The intelligence of the world population falls on a bell grade curve. Who has the capacity to consider such things? Only the top 20% are able to consider what is necessary to maintain, and even control the world. It takes a person of the 20th percentile to consider things like population growth and earth's limited resources. I accept this term of Calhoun's of "behavioral sink" and I wonder, have you noticed it happening to humans already? Seen the movie "Idiocracy" perhaps, and thought, hey we are just like that? One of the most notable aspects of it I think, is this breaking from traditions of religion, and the fairly recent sexual revolution of the 60s-70s. Lets save some time and accept these principles. Now considering that, if you were a 1%er, and you saw these principles in action. You see the health of the earth degrading, you see behavioral sink and so on. As a 1%er, you are one of the few with power enough to really change things. And what would you do to change it? How are you going to conserve the earth's resources? Would you strive to lower the population? How are you going to do that? Well you can kill off a lot of people by starting wars. You can kill off a lot more by secrecy, by putting fluoride in the water and dangerous radiation in cell phones and lots of other stuff. You can create the Federal Reserve and squeeze the economy, making people homeless, subjecting them to conditions that will kill them off. And wait a minute, because how are you going to decide who gets to live and who should die? Do you have the right to decide that? Perhaps as a 1%er, a person of the highest intelligence, you do. After all, you are one of the few who can rise above deciding what is best for an individual, and decide what is best for the species. It will be interesting to see yourself explain to yourself, how you expect to explain to the old, or the stupid, or the infirmed, that they should die for the rest of us. And did you notice, through all of this consideration, suddenly, it became necessary to maintain a state. To create a set of rules, and expect the population to live by them, so that you could remove the ones who did not play by the rules from the gene pool. Because the alternative is the destruction of the planet, and the exhaustion of its resources, and behavioral sink. That's why a state is necessary. What does the Libertarian say to that?

I agree with your friend the engineer, although I come from a different aspect. I also accept his explanations about demolitions. My perspective however comes from the study if US history, a history of false flag events, and most of all, the broken window theory. I just did a google search on the theory and found there is an alternative popular theory, so I will have to explain mine. The broken window theory is this. You are a window maker. You sell a guy a window. Because he has a window now, you cant sell as many windows. Extrapolated across an entire economy, this principle could mean a stagnant economy. So what is a window maker to do? He pays the kid down the street a dollar to throw a rock at the window and break it, thus creating the need for the homeowner to buy another window from you, thus stimulating the economy. So consider that for a second. Consider also, that the average person, what your friend might call the 80%, would not even get as far as considering this principle. Now, consider that America has a giant, corporate, military industrial complex. We have peace times. And because we have peace, no one is buying military items. Because the military industrial complex is probably the largest of any in America, and because it is not being utilized, the economy is stagnating. So what to do? stage a terrorist event, except instead of a broken window, you pay the kid down the street, the terrorists, to break a whole building. The media jumps on it, making lots of money from selling a story. The politicians jump on it, already in bed with corporations (like Dick Cheney who owned so much of Haliburton) and the military industrial complex now has a reason to produce lots of war products for sale. Your gonna need it, for your newly manufactured enemy. Oh yea, and now we have a stimulated economy again, great for the wall street insiders who have already invested in the right stocks. And no one will question the politicians, or the media, or the corporations, because people's intelligence is on a bell-grade-curve, and only 20% of people have the capacity to question what is going on.

Lets step 100 years into the future, and make some large assumptions about the development of technology, considering what I have already linked. If technology is facilitating every need of every human, what need is there for jobs? Your second sentence assumes humans would not be getting resources without jobs. What if the robots are growing all our food? Have you heard of hydroponics? What if they can mine gold automatically? What if they can build houses? A robot would not need "pay" except maybe some electricity and materials to function. Maybe a few engineers monitoring them to make sure they work properly and repair breakdowns. The purpose of robotic work, is to make it so humans do not have to work.

I have read such things, and while I could see that working, what money has become now is a concentrated monstrosity. Even if we went back to sound banking practices, what would be there to prevent it from developing back into another Fed? I am also a fan of at least the CONCEPT of bitcoin. I liked Ben Franklin's idea of "colonial scrip". The only real answer IMO is for people to be making their own money supplies for themselves. Though that would take socialized education of it. Fiat currency is backed by something though, its backed by the slave work of the people the currency represents

I tried this today, and noticed two things. One, I noticed that I hardly ever look at people. I only really look at people when its necessary to do business or trade information. Two, when I do look at people eye to eye, I feel like they can read my mind. I feel ashamed, or strange, feeling what I am feeling, and feeling like people can know what I am thinking. I have certain beliefs and follow certain sciences that suggest its actually possible, though not yet provable. I think this principle is most obvious with women, the "women intuition" thing. I feel like they can certainly tell what I am thinking, and for me to look at people when it seems so obvious is too intense for me, and I cant look at people. It doesnt help I have no social skills. No one has talked to me today though. Even at work. First off thank you for that well cited response Matt, I really appreciate it. Second, there may be something to this "internal block" thing. I often feel like no one cares about me, and so I have no reason to care about others. I feel it is fairly evident given that absolutely no one strives to talk and interact with me, like complete strangers. It has never made sense. I know in order for people to have friends, someone must have had to initiate a first reaction with someone. But it never happens with me. Now I am thinking, perhaps the not looking at people thing has something to do with it. Third, the "empathize with MYSELF as a CHILD" thing... is mind blowing. I feel at such a loss. I have a hard time grasping this concept. To empathize with myself, as a child. To UNDERSTAND how I was feeling as a child? I know what I was feeling at the time. When my dad hit me at 2 for example, I had absolutely no idea why he was hitting me. It just came out of nowhere all of the sudden. I did not have words to describe, or ask, or understand. All I could do was feel, and what I was feeling was a desperation, a dramatic desire to know why? I love you! Why are you hitting me?!? I remember after he hit me I started crying and held desperately to his leg. I dont remember much else. Does that answer your question? I have been in and out of therapy my whole life, it has never helped me. I am here because philosophy has been the most helpful thing I have ever found. I do have emotions, and I express them in certain ways, but never to people. There is no one I even have in my life that would care to hear it.

I am aware of some kind of boom for technology. What I am more concerned about is things like this; http://www.businessinsider.com/momentum-machines-burger-robot-2014-8 This machine has the potential to kill all burger flipping jobs. What are people gonna do if they cant even get a job flipping burgers? http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/01/08/ces-2015-we-ate-3d-printed-pizza The thing is, its not just happening with burgers. I work a Pizza job, and it's already obsolete. A 3D printer can do my job for me at a fraction of the cost. What else can a 3D printer do? It can manufacture small parts, like gun parts, and all that's left for humans to do is some assembly. http://www.rethinkrobotics.com/baxter/ But that's not all robots can do, things like baxter are capable of some assembly, packaging, machine tending and more. There goes the manufacturing industry. Who knows what will be available in coming decades? So considering this and more, there is never gonna be a recovery for the job sector. Only a slowly declining workforce necessity, as robots begin to do all the work for us.

Just to discuss it really, see if anyone has had any similar or interesting experiences with it. I am getting the sense from your post powder that, religion is not a popular thing around here? I mean I have had my share of being opposed to religion. Kabbalah has been most interesting to me because I started out studying the dollar, wondering at some of the symbols on it like the pyramid and the eye. Like what does it have to do with America? Well, it seems things like these symbols, and the Masons which have their hands all over US history, have roots in things like this. And that is what I experienced with Christianity, though I never made many bones about not exactly liking it. I did get rejected for not being part of the "cool christian kids" sometimes. Didnt care much. Was usually more fun to be playing without those kinds anyway. I haven't really joined any Kabbalist community though, just had it mentioned to me, and have been looking into things about it on my own.

I remember Stef once talking about mirror neurons, and that they have something to do with the ability to emphasize. They are developed during childhood when parents make eye contact with their children. I have been looking at some videos where mothers are looking at their children. There is even one of them where a woman is singing to her baby, and he starts crying happily. This thread of thought is all about me, because I dont think I am able to empathize. I can sympathize. I can deduce that I would not like if something happened to me, and thus that another person must not enjoy if something happened to them. But I can't understand how people are feeling. It makes me think of my childhood. I can't remember my parents ever looking at me, like a human. I can remember being treated like an object. I can remember my dad hitting me when I was 2. But I cant remember them ever looking at me in the eye. Part of why I am on this forum is to explore problems like this, and see if I can do anything about it, but Stef often says things like "a person who has not grown mirror neurons his whole life is not going to suddenly grow them and start doing good things". This seems to make sense, as I have always had people problems. I wonder, if I always will.

Fine. If that is the way it is, fine. Women don't care, and neither will I. I will play dirty and they will have no right to complain, and that will be all I explain of it.

I can remember being about 5 years old, and my kindergarten teacher telling my class we were all going to get some fairy dust sprinkled on us, and we wouldnt get to go outside until we felt the magic. YAY! I thought, being a 5 year old kid. I am going to see real magic! I was so excited, I couldnt wait until it was my turn. I was so full of hope! So then it got to be my turn, and the teacher sprinkled the dust on me, and asked me if I felt it. I didnt feel anything. I said no. She did it again and asked again. I said no. She did it a third time, and I kinda just stared at her, my hope deflated. She was lying to me. There was no such thing as magic. It was probably the first time I recognized that adults lie. So I lied and said "I feel it" and went outside to play. That is the kind of experience all of religion has been for me. A bunch of anti-philosophical, socially manipulated lemmings all running off the religion cliff. Since I was very young, I knew it was a waste and a lie. I just participated in it because I knew I had to put up with my parents. Now, there was a good long time where I was athiest, but during that time, I never did really contemplate my decision, I just knew I liked it better than being a brainwashed christian. As I grew up, I started thinking about it more, and it just did not sit right with me. The big bang theory? Sure ok, that makes some sense, but then something would have had to precede it. And then I got to thinking, well ya know, no one can disprove the big bang theory, but no one can disprove god either. It is a possibility that there is some kind of god. Just as much as the big bang thing anyway. Not only that, but I kinda WANTED there to be a god. The idea that I might just live for a while and then die and disappear forever is pretty depressing. Now, I knew better than to just go and accept any god anybody was willing to shovel at me, but I still wanted to find one, even if god did not exist. Then within the last year, I started going to an NLP meetup. I met a guy who is certified in it, as well as many other kinds of spiritual and energetic healing. He had lots of interesting facts, some I already knew, some I verified, and others I have not yet looked into. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt though because the things I was looking into, checked out. Some of the things he was telling me had to do with spiritual explanations, and I was shocked to find I could test his claims and find evidence of them empirically, by practicing some of his exercises. So one of the things he mentioned that I should look into is Kabbalah. Kabbalah is a Jewish science, with origins dating somewhere around 4000 BC, that explains how the universe works. Some of the things that Kabbalah has found in those 4000 years ago, are things that Quantum Physics are proving true today! Now I have not looked through the whole Kabbalist belief (?) system, but what I have seen so far seems to check out. What I am most interested in, is that Kabbalah goes on to explain that there is a god/higher realm/something spiritual, and the problem is that we cannot sense it, sense god, with our limited five senses. We have to develop a sixth sense, as if we had no eyes and had to develop eyes, to see god. We have to develop our perceptual reasoning. I was also amazed at how many conclusions I had come to about life before I found Kabbalah, and how many conclusions seemed to coincide with it. If you want to know more, check out this video, which really turned me on to it, and tell me what you think;

I would say there are no jobs left because existing industries have become so eloquent that they can produce a lot with little cost of business, in addition to the constant improvement of technology taking jobs. Robots are starting to do all the work, and there is not much work left for humans to do. Eventually, robots are gonna do all the work, and that will be a crazy time.

I am getting close to 30, and never had a real relationship. I have had two "girlfriends" some friends with benefits, but never had anything meaningful. I kinda had a rocky upbringing, certainly skewed my expectations of man woman relationships, and I am still lost. So I wanted to get here a general consensus about what people think should happen in several relationships, starting from the most "shallow" to the most deep. I want to share my thoughts about what I think I, and a woman, can expect at each stage. 1) The first stage would be the one night stand. Steph has spoken at length about the traditional relationship between men and women, women giving sex, men giving money. In a more recent video he speaks about an experiment where monkeys were taught to use coins, and the females used them to buy bananas, and the males used them to buy sex. Its hardwired into us I suppose, though we should supposedly be evolving from that. In the modern day and age, it has never made sense to me why women can not just have sex for sex' sake. Despite what the media portrays, women like sex, and they like men. Sure they have the traditional problem of possibly getting pregnant, but safe practice, condoms, preventative shots, morning after pill, and if all else fails abortion are all choices a woman can make to prevent it. Knowing all these things there is no reason a baby ever has to be born, unless the woman choose it. STDs are an issue as well of course, but some common sense and safety can take care of that as well. Not being a woman myself I am not sure of all the social ramifications of sleeping around more often, but it has always perplexed me how anyone could let society matter so much to them. I have never been happy trying to pander to society, and seeing as how it seems harsher on women, I always wondered why they bother trying so much. So with all that out of the way, the money issue now comes into play. If I am going to pay for an expensive dinner, buy drinks and dresses and whatever else, theres no two ways about it, I feel like I am paying for a whore. I might not say that up front, but thats what it is. So if I am going to pay, why bother with someone's personality who I probably don't like if they have the whore mentality? I mean sure I'd sleep with her, but I probably don't want to know her. I am more of a bachelor in this respect and I am really fine with it, but I have never truly been able to respect a girl who expects to be paid for something she enjoys. Thats just milking it, being a whore. Women who have sex just because they like it and want to, I have more respect for. If she wants a one nighter and doesnt wanna know me so much either, thats fine with me too. But if I have to pay, I might as well have gone to vegas. So what can a woman expect here? All that makes sense to me is that she can expect a decent friendliness, perhaps a playful jerk, who turns her on. There shouldnt be any non-mutual spending involved. 2) Then there's friends with benefits. It makes sense to stick with one or few people, to eliminate disease risks. Its more comfortable and less hassle too. Nothing wrong with sex just for fun. Hanging out and maybe a little money spent here and there is cool too. It just has to be discussed if anyone starts having feelings. It certainly could happen, bumping the uglys. But finding mr. or ms. right probably takes a while, and just having fun until you meet them is beneficial to both parties. 3) then there is probably open relationships. the "main chick" mentality, where maybe you and her are still with other people, but if one of you needs something from the other, you will drop what you are doing to take care of them. It could be equals, it could be housewife/hubby, or something else. It depends on the rules set really, for the two to decide on. 4) then there is the committed relationship. Likely all planned out families are going to fall in this category. Someone is going to have to be a breadwinner. Both could do it I suppose, but if there are children, they will certainly suffer from lack of attention. Perhaps with two breadwinners a nanny could be hired. Otherwise, someone makes the money, and someone tends the house and children. Anything else makes for a broken home. This is ideal for anyone really, but I see people as fitting into "bell grade curves" all between a continuum of horrible and perfect. The people closer towards the perfect side are likely taken up, and SOMEONE is gonna have to put up with "lesser" people. Or, everyone will just be miserable and alone, something that is markedly happening in places like Japan, and even the US. This option is the most business of business deals really, where you both have to agree on a lot of heavy stuff for it to work. Or, there will be a high divorce/separation rate, as can be seen in the US. So that's what makes sense to me, and it seems to me that what is happening in the west is mostly a lot of over expectant, uneducated, unemployed people without social skills or prospects, not even trying for anything. A lot of guys are OK with more casual relationships, feeling like no one is really that special and not wanting to commit to women these days, but women's expectations, especially for the times, are unrealistic. They want the "real man" (which actually is not a real man, but fictional story characters) who never have problematic issues of their own lives, or even their own feelings. They don't want to feel like whores but they still expect you to buy them stuff, even when youre "just a friend". And to top it all off, with feminism, they want "equality" which usually ends up meaning entitlements, never being an equal in the dating realm by initiating/sustaining conversation, paying for dates etc. but all the benefits of being the man in a relationship. What is a young guy in the US to do? I know plenty of people in online games, and they have all pretty much given up, being semi-satisfied with free online porn and their hands. At this rate however, I think the west will start to follow in Japan's footsteps, with a declining population.

My life was more difficult than the post I think. I have gotten by mostly by sticking to the idea that I do not need people and their opinions do not matter. I don't get ashamed so easily. Although, I certainly have never understood socializing, always been alone and rarely had any friends. I am fairly old and dont really have any. I am almost OK with it, though now that I am achieving certain philosophical goals I am starting to understand thats not the way its supposed to be for a fulfilled life. I also am very unempathetic. Sociopathic maybe. I dont care about anyone, cept maybe my sister. I often have found myself wishing my parents would die painful deaths, and that I even hope it gets recorded so I can watch it. Then I think about what I am thinking about, and wonder at how much of a messed up person I must be. The thing is, being shaken as a baby was only a part of what I went through, its just the first thing I am looking to understand. I don't really talk to anyone, cept online. Never had a forum where I could discuss things philosophically. Therapy has not helped much, but philosophy has. I think if I am going to find answers, it will be here.

That sounds right. Though I dont think it would be received well, until the next recession. I was at a couple of occupy rallies during the last one, and people wanted to learn what I was learning, but at the moment times are "good" and people don't wanna hear it. According to this; http://www.amazon.com/The-Crash-2016-Destroy-America/dp/0446584835 and a couple of other sources, there should be another recession between 2016 and 2018, and the time will be right for people to receive it.

If the government is a democracy, then technically, the people do control the currency, and unifying people of a country under one currency eliminates the problem of having to invest in a bunch of different currencies to do business with a bunch of different entities. Entities like the Federal Reserve (and I am guessing the Australian Reserve) are private entities, neither government nor people, thus turning money into a mechanic of slavery. Governments are also subject to corruption, so money in the hands of government can be problematic as well.

Nnnuuuuuuuu!!! Lets end the Fed instead. Right after a match of Smash Bros. Yes, and yes, and yes. Actually one of the reasons I am here is because I want to start a philosophy journal, and have other thinkers reflect on it. I feel I have things fairly well thought through but I keep ending up back in the same circular rut, so its time for others input.

You mean, the monopoly you said cannot exist in a free market? Stephan himself talks about a monopoly that exists (the Federal Reserve and its dollar) the attempt to install competition for it through Bitcoin, and the dangers it poses to the monopoly. Stephan is a proponent of Bitcoin BECAUSE the monopolization of the dollar has created bad things for people. Steph's video here; http://free.yudu.com/item/details/430875/The-Creature-From-Jekyll-Island I have read the entire book "The Creature from Jekyll Island" which you can read free here online, which outlines the history of America escaping from the monopoly of paper currency time and time again. Britain first enforced the monopoly, which Washington freed us from. But we were in debt for the cost of the war, and so Alexander Hamilton returned us to monopoly. Congress then removed us, and Britain returned us with the war of 1812 and another private central bank. Jackson then freed us, and over 50 years later, we were once again returned to monopoly by the Federal Reserve, blamed for recessions and depressions including America's latest. Every time we have freed ourselves from monopoly, the banks have targeted our government officials, and got them to return us to it. As long as there has been monopoly on our money supply, we, and the rest of the world, have suffered for it.

I believe a free market can never truly exist. First, because any situation in which freedoms exist which perpetuate a free market, also allow for freedoms which an individual or institution could form a monopoly. Second, if you or someone else created an institution which upheld principles of a free market, the institution itself would be targeted by men looking to create monopolies, and eventually infiltrated, as we have seen with the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve. The best we could hope for is something Jefferson talked about, and I can't remember the quote exactly, but he said something along the lines of we should create an institution with the idea in mind that corrupt men WOULD eventually infiltrate it, and put plans in place for the institution to then be torn down.